Prospect_b

Wow. And if someone tells you ingame you're doing something wrong, you automatically tell him "shut it noob", right? Why would I need to weigh in on such a stupid argument to begin with? Here, let me be a filthy elitist and use the magic of numbers: you: Saipan: don't have one Atlanta: 52% wr, and a phenomenal 18.8K dmg El2a: Saipan: 89% wr Atlanta: 62% wr (79k) (solo of course) I don't know if it makes you a troll, but there is probably some kind of term for fools that start arguments against people who have vastly superior knowledge of the topic at hand. Also, you're not having an "argument". You made a stupid statement, and once El2a picked in on it, you ran away with some lame [edited]excuse like a little snowflake girl. So forgive me if I'm not impressed with you talking the talk.

True. He has neither Saipan or Atlanta, and if he did, he would have horrible ratings with them... @El2aZeR is just that typical forumite who spouts empty opinions on everything, without knowing what he's talking about. Unlike you. Oh wait...

it's your full birthday there... https://takemeback.to/14-July-1984 "Saturday July 14, 1984 It was Saturday, under the sign of Cancer" It sure was.

I dare you to read your own comment again. You say: "Bots aim for cit + Bots hit a lot => hence angling is useless" Sorry for doubting the superunicums that play coop. I'll gladly go back to pvp where people purposely don't aim for my citadel and/or miss a lot, so angling is still useful.

10/10 logic. I'd stick with forum trolling if I were you.

by none

Agreed, although 5-7 seconds might be somewhat short, even more cause we already have enough ppl claiming DDs are OP now with BB AP changes ;) Maybe more like DD ~ 10, CA~15, BB~20 (with possible specials depending on CA/CL difference, calibre difference, etc) And if I remember correctly, there was a stream a while ago where the devs or PR guys said that such a differentiation would make sense. I have no idea though if it is somewhere on their ToDo list. Probably not since it would get a lot of flak from BBkevins.

Did you read my post? Except for some specific settings to enable and some different lingo, it is almost the exact same thing as installing a game on a winbox. (ie couldn't be further away from "pointless pain") If anything is still "difficult" regarding gaming on linux, it is because MS has infiltrated the market with some debatable strategies, and users are too lazy/stupid to change, often with 20 year olds paradigms of linux in their head (I should remind myself to wish you a happy 2009 next month btw), which makes game developers reluctant to invest much time in it. The lovely thing about Valve/steam investing here, is it will attract at least some users/consumers to switch or at least give it a try. More users on alternative systems will make more & more devs interested. It is just a question of breaking the vicious circle. (Also, I'm not even sure what you mean by "everything else"...)

what IFHE changes? This Especially when compared to belfast, which has the stealth + tools to take out DDs with ease and is extremely game deciding like that. While Stalingrad is an excellent Cruiserkiller in a meta where you often see only 2 or 3 cruisers... The main thing I have against Stalingrad is it provides a way to go around the 1BB limit in CBs (besides the aforementioned addition of yet another anticruiser tool. Good thing the alaska is coming to finally help against the high tier cruiser invasion)

Almost exactly the same, I'm still twiddling with some settings. At the moment it is better than winX when I disable the ingame AA and tweak the nvidia settings to override. (though that's not telling a lot I guess cause the same should be possible in winX (right?), but I never did that) edit: never mind, I did do that in winX, too long ago to remember immediately. Linux FPS is better. edit: never mind v 2.0: I can't really compare. I just realized I used Vsync in WinX, and I'm not too sure about all the graphics options I used there. Short version is I don't notice any real difference.

Sigh, I know. Apparantly you can go back to upstart in ubuntu (https://appuals.com/remove-systemd-ubuntu-permanently/) though I have no experience with it. You did see me saying I installed nvidia proprietary, right? Anyway, I run a 1060/6GB

This. Seeing that z winrate made me die a little inside. Close to three % worse than shima, while the vast, vast majority of shima players is worthless beyond belief? Like how??

Not saying it is fun having such a bad mm streak, but range in Amagi should be somewhat sufficient imho...

For that kind of money you can get ten happy endings. Maybe more if you're fast...

Not to be rude, but I have no idea how you get a positive winrate with those damage numbers. For both ships they are very low, I'd say should be at least double.

quite sure that sentence has never been uttered before in history.

True, but at the same time I remember being constantly enthrilled by the exploration of "the next best thing" when I started this game myself, so I'd understand why that particular advice might be hard to adhere to

Another thing. You really don't want to pass beyond tier 5 with a DD without concealment expert. You will need a lot of XP to get enough skillpoints, granted, but I can only imagine the horrors of smt like a mutsuki without CE. That's why I'd recommend playing in both IJN and US lines the tier 4 a lot, and by that I mean don't just play it until you can unlock the tier 5 ship, but play until you have enough or close to enough captain XP to unlock CE. And tier 4 because it has on the US side the clemson, aka the clubson (ever wondered why you see so many of them at your tiers? And why they don't all to seem very newbie... yea...) and the isokaze on the IJN side, which is probably the strongest IJN dd in tier 1-6. (umikaze maybe notwithstanding? Any clubbing expert is free to do some input here ) On your US cruiser line you might want to linger at t3, the saint louis is very strong, until you have some more captain XP. No idea about the british cruisers, I got them immediately from tier 6 (and if not, I would have freexpd till there :P )

This @Lea_Flamma You might have heard people calling the IJN DD line (at least the one leading to the shimakaze) "THE torp boat line". Just some nuances regarding the different lines - The IJN dds we're talking about. I'd say the highlight might be tier 6 and 7, where you have the superior 3x3 torp launchers, with around 1 minute reload, combined with decent matchmaking and limited radars. Every IJN DD that sees tier ten is probably subpar, especially for newer players. (The stealth is less and less of an argument, since they are becoming more and more powercrept in that department too) - US DDs can't stealth torp until Mahan at tier 7. The t7/8 are capable torpedoboats, though nothing remarkable. At T9/10 (since gearing can mount "fletcher torps"), @El2aZeR might be correct in calling them the best torp DDs. - The PanAsia DDs can't torp DDs, but their torps are borderline OP-stealthy. Which would make Chung Mu a very decent contender with Fletcher. - German DDs are capable torp boats, but especially the tier ten can spew out 8 out them every minute. RoF is something not to be underestimated in the torp department. --- If you want to start with DDs as your first shiptype (and you should play other types anyway), I'd recommend going for something more flexible than boats who rely mostly on their one trick. Any one of the other 3 I mentioned might be ok, if I had to pick one it'll probably be the USN dds.

Somewhat trollish (not even the Omaha can be literally oneshotted by let's say a minsk) though I wouldn't be surprised that tier 5 is the breaking point for a lot of new players, let alone those who are foolish enough not to go for the masterrace immediately.

You're pointing the wrong part of your ship towards the reds

*edited

I hate myself for clicking on "show post". Anyway. I have the wiki link posted next to it. I'm quite sure you can read at least the full first paragraph. This is the dumbest argument to be made in this discussion, so I'm glad you made it. Yes, a government removes choices. And yes, it's good. Can you own a gun? Maybe, I guess? Can you own an attack helicopter? No? Hmm you must be living in a fascist dictatorship too. Are you allowed to kill your own children? No? Jeez, even the Romans allowed it, your place must be so backward. Are you allowed to drive at any speed wherever you want? No? Please start the revolution now, you're being oppressed. But to be fair, simpletons like you are the exact reason why sometimes a government has to remove more personal choice than would be ideal, or we would be back to the caveman era in no time. Also, are you really trying to convince me that you are a grown adult? Anyway, always nice to talk to someone like "you people". Cheerio

I understand. Just as I am bored of you trying to avoid the point, and in your sideways to the point always resort to nonsense. I didn't say anything about "(getting permission to) owning a shop". My "1. Apply to open a shop" entailed the total process of getting a location, permits, etc to buy/sell certain goods/services. Also, an empty shop without permission to do anything in it is not a shop. A shop is defined by buying/selling goods/services. Your "empty shop without permission to sell whatever" is called a location, or a room, or a place in 3D space; cause an "empty shop" is as nonsensical as a square circle. Sure, it can be so in your thoughts, just as the place where the Eifel Tower stands is a football field. Just need to remove that tower, adjust the field, install some things. That's just tiny details of course. I have no clue whatsoever why you are determined to interpret it in such a specific way; or even to focus on such a minor detail to begin with - irrelevant to the point I was trying to make, and that you, as I said earlier, avoid. I guess it's easier to just spew out snide remarks about other countries, and if a point is made in return, avoid it alltogether.

??? Are you kidding me? There is of course a semantic difference between the two, but they are logically connected. Once you meet certain legal requirements, you are permitted to do so. The process of getting the confirmation that you adhere to the requirements, is what I meant by "apply to open a shop". Checking https://www.gov.uk/set-up-business gives a manifold of rules. Maybe you meant "permit" in some stricter sense, as on the middle of that page. Whatever. --- Point you are still avoiding. - You are OK that a "real life" betting shop has to fulfill certain "legal requirements" (https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/for-gambling-businesses/for-gambling-businesses.aspx - You are not OK that Belgium has found transgressions in the operations of "gambling" in games, because they don't conform to normal gambling legal requirements, and has asked the developers to change it (or be punished), which makes this country unfree in your view Being Ok with one and not the other doesn't go together. Either all the rules that regulate gambling are "unfree" (so also the UK), or, if you do agree that "real" gambling should follow certain rules, you should adjust your position towards the legality of lootboxes.